# in Re David Cleo Richard

> Texas Court of Appeals, 1st District (Houston) · November 21, 2017

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/4222795

## Case

- **Court:** Texas Court of Appeals, 1st District (Houston)
- **Decided:** November 21, 2017
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Opinion
- **Cited by:** 0 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/4222795

## Opinion text

Opinion issued November 21, 2017

In The

Court of Appeals
For The

First District of Texas
————————————
NO. 01-17-00856-CR
———————————
IN RE DAVID CLEO RICHARD, Relator

Original Proceeding on Petition for Writ of Mandamus

MEMORANDUM OPINION

David Cleo Richard, acting pro se, has filed a petition seeking madamus relief

against the Texas Board of Pardons and Paroles.1 This court’s mandamus jurisdiction

is governed by Section 22.221 of the Texas Government Code. Section 22.221

expressly limits the mandamus jurisdiction of the courts of appeals to: (1) writs

1
The underlying case is The State of Texas v. David Richard, cause number
473584 in the 232nd District Court of Harris County.
against a district court judge or a county court judge in the court of appeals’ district;

and (2) all writs necessary to enforce the court of appeals’ jurisdiction. TEX. GOV’T

CODE § 22.221. The Board of Pardons and Paroles is not a district court or county

court judge in this court’s district, and Richard has not shown that the issuance of a

writ compelling the requested relief is necessary to enforce this court’s appellate

jurisdiction. Therefore, we do not have jurisdiction to issue a writ of mandamus

against the Board of Pardons and Paroles. See TEX. GOV’T CODE § 22.221; In re

Fowler, No. 14–15–00712–CR, 2015 WL 5092623, at *1 (Tex. App.—Houston

[14th Dist.] Aug. 27, 2015, orig. proceeding) (mem. op., not designated for

publication).

Accordingly, Richard’s petition for writ of mandamus is dismissed for want

of jurisdiction.

PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Justices Keyes, Brown, and Lloyd.

Do not publish. TEX. R. APP. P. 47.2(b).

2

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/4222795. Public record. Not legal advice.